1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Enabling 4GB RAM in XP SP2

Discussion in 'Motherboards & Memory' started by cjoyce1980, Jul 17, 2007.

  1. cjoyce1980 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    715 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    I've installed an extra 2GB of RAM in a DELL 745 to mae 4GB, but windows only sees 3GB and its says 4GB in the BIOS.

    I've turned page file off and it only still sees 3GB.

    How can i make it see this extra gig? :confused:
     
  2. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Short version = you can't.

    It has to do with the way the 32 bit OS addresses memory spaces.
     
  3. HookeyStreet

    HookeyStreet Eat, sleep, game!

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Messages:
    7,135 (1.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    523
    Location:
    Great Yarmouth, England
    Wile E is correct, 4GB will never be 'shown' in Windows XP :(
     
  4. theonetruewill New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,996 (1.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    240
    Location:
    London - Close your eyes and you'll see me
    Windows 32bit can only ever have just under 4GB in total memory. That includes virtual memory, RAM, and Gfx memory.
     
  5. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Yeah, you'll have to move to x64 Windows, to make use of it all.
     
  6. mikey8684

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    423 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Location:
    Infront Of PC ... Perth, WA
    I also have 4GB ram on XP MCE (32Bit) and VISTA Ultimate (64Bit) in a Dual boot and both say that I only have 3.25GB in the bios & system properties but in system information it says "Total Physical Memory = 4,096MB" ....:confused:

    Does this mean that its like I only have 3GB installed or is coz of binary and such that it just cant be displayed in XP ... coz my Vista Ultimate says the same in the mentioned locations but its 64Bit, which I was under the impression that 64Bit could display 4GB or more.

    OR AM I JUST CONFUSING THE HELL OUT OF MYSELF AND SHOULD JUST SHUT UP

    But the only thing Im woried about is --- is it still performing with the full 4GB or not ...:confused:

    :pimp:
     
  7. tkpenalty New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,958 (2.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    345
    Location:
    Australia, Sydney
    Um guys...... ever heard of PAE? :p
     
  8. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    that still wont do a full 4 gig...more like 2.9
     
  9. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Go thru your BIOS and look for a feature called Memory Hole Remap (or something similar), and enable it.

    Still won't show the full 4GB. I get 3.25GB with /pae or /3GB enabled. (Note that the /3GB switch automatically enables PAE)
     
  10. mikey8684

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    423 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Location:
    Infront Of PC ... Perth, WA
    Mine must have PAE (Physical Address Extension) enable coz it says it under the hardware list in my computer properties and says I have 3.25GB....

    But still does this mean my PC is only using what it is stating or is it actually using 4GB but because its 32Bit can only display 3.25GB ... :confused:
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2007
  11. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Physical Address Extension. It makes Windows address memory slightly differently. But do what I said in my post above yours first, then we'll talk PAE and /3GB. lol
     
  12. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    physical address extension
    it maps more "areas" for windows to write to as memory
     
  13. cjoyce1980 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    715 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    using /PAE i get 3.5GB now, that still better than having a whole gig wasting away

    copy of my boot.ini file

    Code:
    [boot loader]
    timeout=30
    default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS
    [operating systems]
    multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /noexecute=optin /fastdetect /PAE
    
     
  14. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    I suggest the /3GB switch. It limits the kernel to 1GB and allows the rest to programs. /PAE splits it down the middle. The kernel doesn't need that much ram.
     
  15. cjoyce1980 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    715 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    What is the difference?
     
  16. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    with just the PAE switch, the Windows kernel reserves 1.75GB of your 3.5GB all to itself. Programs can't access anymore than 1.75GB, in that config.

    If you use /3GB instead, the kernel only reserves 1GB, leaving 2.5GB for your programs to use.
     
  17. EviLZeD

    EviLZeD New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    818 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    47
    usually for me xp 32bit picked up 3.25gb on my recent install its detected 3.5gb also vista 64bit
    has detected all the ram
     
  18. cjoyce1980 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    715 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    so with this switch, kernel gets 512mb and system gets 3GB? right :confused:
     
  19. ex_reven New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.76/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    no. The kernel will still have 1 gig.
    Ordinarily, without the switch the ram usage is split 50/50.
    The 3gb switch just means that it will limit the kernel to 1 gig and give the remainder to applications etc.
     
    cjoyce1980 says thanks.
  20. cjoyce1980 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    715 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    let me get this right, so with page file off, 128mb video ram and 4gb of system ram i will have
    1GB for kernel
    2.75GB for system

    or is it......

    1GB for kernel
    3GB for system

    :confused:
     
  21. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    1GB = kernel

    The rest of what Windows sees of your ram = applications.

    With out it, Windows splits the ram evenly between kernel and apps.

    Note that applications CANNOT access the ram set aside for the kernel.


    EDIT: Trust us, just add the /3GB switch to your boot.ini It's just better. lol
     
    cjoyce1980 says thanks.
  22. cjoyce1980 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    715 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    cheers guys, many thanks
     
  23. niko084

    niko084

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,636 (2.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    729
    I wish windows xp would use ram like Windows Server os's.... :(

    Just use it to cache instead as an os...
    Like see and use all 16 gigs and just cache multiple programs on boot including your os.. :(
     
  24. Was_ser New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
  25. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Do you even understand why the 4GB limit is even there? :slap:
    Sure you can force windows to install under 8GB ram but it doesn't meant that the extra will get utlized like it is in X86-64.
    Whats the point of seeing 8GB in windows if it cannot address that memeory for application use?

    One thing you need to know is the OP is using Windows XP, it is not like Win Vista that is build upon a kernal similar to Win Server 2003 .
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page